I got you. That's a fair response. I respect that there are aspects of it that do require legislative change.
My second point goes more to the discussion of why there are some concerns and confusion around here. We already challenged you, Chair, on the scope of this, but it goes to the question around the tech briefing. I just want it clear for all Canadians who are watching or reviewing this.
On the tech briefing, we were notified very last minute. In fact, we received the link for those MPs less than 20 minutes before the brief actually occurred. I sent a follow-up, in fact, to the parliamentary secretary at the 45-minute mark asking where it was, and we had it.
When the questions came up, there were only two people, me and Mr. Motz, and we were restricted to one question each with a follow-up, and I had a pile. Before we knew it, the tech briefing was over. Again, I have nothing against any of the officials who were part of the briefing yesterday, but it was over so quickly. I know from talking to other colleagues, and this is my concern here, that this amendment was not debated.
We had that discussion at length on the previous amendments. This wasn't part of the original bill. We have not quite 338 MPs in the House of Commons right now, after the resignations. My point is that all sorts of colleagues, who represent Canadians right across this country, are still asking us questions.
Just to go back to the previous point, we do kindly request that the government and the parliamentary secretary consider offering another technical briefing opportunity for all MPs and not only for those who had the benefit of our wonderful officials here at the table.
I'll leave my remarks at that, Mr. Chair.